Enron as a symptoms of audit process breakdown: Can the Sarbanes-Oxley Act cure the disease?

Critical Perspectives on Accounting

Volumn 15, Issue 6-7, 2004, Pages 853-864

  Cullinan, Charlie ^a  

^a BRYANT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Audit process; Auditor independence; Enron; Fraud detection and prevention; Sarbanes Oxley Act

Indexed keywords

EID: 3142768284     PISSN: 10452354     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2003.06.007     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). AICPA professional standards, vol. 1. New York: AICPA; 2001.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). SAS # 99, Consideration of fraud in a financial statement audit. New York: AICPA; 2002.
3. Arthur Andersen. Report to the Worldcom Audit Committee, Year ended December 31, 2001. 6 February 2002, http://www.sec.gov/news/extra/wcrevex1.pdf (accessed 20 September 2002).
4. Barboza D. Its assets may have been misstated by $24 billion, Enron discloses. The New York Times; 23 April 2002. p. C10.
5. Beattie V. Fearnley S. Brandt R. Auditor independence and audit risk in the UK: a reconceptualization. In: Presented at the American Accounting Association Professionalism and Ethics Symposium. 14 August 2002
6. Bernardi R.A. Fraud detection: the effect of client integrity and competence and auditor cognitive style Auditing: J. Practice Theory 13 Suppl. 1993 68-84
7. Briloff A.J. The private securities litigation reform from a critical accountant's perspective Crit. Perspect. Accounting 10 3 1999 267-282
8. Caramanis C.V. Assessing the impact of 'liberalisation' on auditor behavior: accounting research in politically charged contexts Accounting Auditing Accountability J. 115 1998 562-592
9. Cullinan C.P. Sutton S.G. Defrauding the public interest: a critical examination of reengineered audit processes and the likelihood of fraud detection Crit. Perspect. Accounting 13 3 2002 297-310
10. Eichenwald K. Andersen trial yields evidence in Enron's fall. The New York Times; 17 June 2002. p. A1.
11. Eichenwald K. Glater J. Andersen hinted of risk, but sounded no alarm. The New York Times; 14 February 2002. p. C9
12. Eichenwald K. Norris F. Early verdict on audit procedures: ignored. The New York Times; 6 June 2002. p. C6
13. Humphrey C. Moizer P. From techniques to ideologies: an alternative perspective on the audit function Crit. Perspect. Accounting 1 30 1990 217-238
14. Koo C.M. Sim H.S. On the role conflict of auditors in Korea Accounting Auditing Accountability 12 2 1999 206-219
15. MacDonald E. Cendant's former auditor suggests it was misled. The Wall Street J. 1998;22 July:A3
16. McKinnon J.M. Why aren't auditors heading off scandals? The Blade. Toledo: OH; 21 July 2002. p. D1.
17. Paltrow S.J. Accounting-overhaul plan draws skepticism. The Wall Street J. 2002;8 July:C1.
18. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In the matter of Maria Mei Wenner, CPA, respondent; 1998a. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/3440290.txt (accessed 20 September 2002).
19. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In the matter of Richard Valade, CPA, respondent; 1998b. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/3440002.txt (accessed 1 May 2003).
20. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In the matter of Bonnie K. Metz, respondent; 2000a. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-43361.htm (accessed 20 September 2002).
21. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In the matter of Cendant Corporation respondent; 2000b. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-42933.htm (accessed 16 September 2002).
22. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In the matter of Arthur Andersen LLP respondent; 2001a. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-44444.htm (accessed 1 May 2003).
23. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In the matter of Jeffrey Bacsik, CPA, respondent; 2001b. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-45196.htm (accessed 24 July 2002).
24. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In the matter of Charles K. Springer, CPA, Robert S. Haugen, CPA, Haugen, Springer & Co., PC, respondents; 2001c. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-44858.htm (accessed 25 September 2002).
25. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In the matter of Sunbeam Corporation, respondent; 2001d. http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/33-7976.htm (accessed 16 September 2002).
26. Sikka P. Puxty A. Willmott H. Cooper C. The impossibility of eliminating the expectations gap: some theory and evidence Crit. Perspect. Accounting 93 1998 299-330
27. US Congress. An act: to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures made pursuant to the securities laws, and for other purposes. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 107th Congress, H.R. 3763; 2002.
28. Waggoner J.B. Auditor detection rates in an internal control test Auditing: J. Practice Theory 9 2 1990 77-89
29. Wright A. Wright S. An examination of factors affecting the decision to waive audit adjustments J. Accounting, Auditing Fin. 12 1 1997 15-36